openstack
/
governance
Code Issues Proposed changes
governance/630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ec...

188 lines
8.5 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

{
"comments": [
{
"unresolved": false,
"key": {
"uuid": "94d88acf_23a4f590",
"filename": "/PATCHSET_LEVEL",
"patchSetId": 1
},
"lineNbr": 0,
"author": {
"id": 5314
},
"writtenOn": "2023-04-27T21:48:51Z",
"side": 1,
"message": "I\u0027m not against this, but I\u0027m not in favor, either. See comment inline.",
"revId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
},
{
"unresolved": true,
"key": {
"uuid": "659eef51_289b85b8",
"filename": "reference/release-naming.rst",
"patchSetId": 1
},
"lineNbr": 84,
"author": {
"id": 11805
},
"writtenOn": "2023-04-27T12:35:17Z",
"side": 1,
"message": "I think the first sentence here needs better reasoning for why this work is necessary. I don\u0027t think branch names and repository names need to be in sync.\n\nMy counter argument to this is that if you look in /etc/apt/sources.list on an Ubuntu machine to see the configured repositories, you\u0027ll find \"deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu jammy main restricted\" for Ubuntu 22.04. And this has never been an issue.\n\nI\u0027m not saying we won\u0027t do this, but I\u0027m just not convinced that it\u0027s necessary.",
"revId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
},
{
"unresolved": true,
"key": {
"uuid": "e75e108f_ea8d14b2",
"filename": "reference/release-naming.rst",
"patchSetId": 1
},
"lineNbr": 84,
"author": {
"id": 5314
},
"writtenOn": "2023-04-27T21:48:51Z",
"side": 1,
"message": "Corey has a good point. We (that is, the upstream openstack community) supply both a \"release identification code\" (year.count) *and* a \"release name\". We tried to stick with the release identification code only, but you may recall that there was community outcry, and the Foundation agreed to take on the task of coming up with a release name each cycle, which they have been doing.\n\nThe 2022-04-24 resolution states (bullet point 4):\n\n\u003e The release number will be used as the primary identifier in the development cycle but the release name will also be used in some places. we will use release number in the stable branch (Example: stable/2023.1), spec repo or any other directory structure, testing tools etc. The release team can choose either to continue using the release name or use number for release tooling and milestone name.\n\nIf you look at what the release team is doing right now (2023-04-27, 20:39 UTC), what you see is:\n\nhttps://releases.openstack.org/bobcat/schedule.html\n\nand the title on that page is:\n\n2023.2 Bobcat Release Schedule\n\nand you will note that \"2023.2 Bobcat\" follows *exactly* the example given at the opening of the \"Release Identification/Name\" document [0].\n\nSo if downstream packagers using the release name causes a problem with consumers locating items of interest upstream, then that\u0027s *our* problem, and we need to make it easier to locate stuff from either the release identification code or the release name.\n\nIt would be different if the downstream distro used a completely different name for \"2023.1 Antelope\" like \"Whiplash\" or something--then it would be their fault if their customers couldn\u0027t find anything upstream.\n\nBut if we are consistent with using \"2023.2 Bobcat\" all over the place, then someone using a \"Bobcat\" distro can easily see that \"2023.2\" is another name for \"Bobcat\", and they can easily locate the stable branch that contains the Bobcat code, even though it\u0027s named stable/2023.2\n\n\n[0] https://opendev.org/openstack/governance/blame/commit/967446d0a1a1a4e7f25c47f4c6d88cb5d2276b0e/reference/release-naming.rst#L13",
"parentUuid": "659eef51_289b85b8",
"revId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
},
{
"unresolved": true,
"key": {
"uuid": "f893c62a_47210a0b",
"filename": "reference/release-naming.rst",
"patchSetId": 1
},
"lineNbr": 84,
"author": {
"id": 11975
},
"writtenOn": "2023-05-17T11:22:30Z",
"side": 1,
"message": "@Brian: very good point IMO. I fully agree with You.",
"parentUuid": "e75e108f_ea8d14b2",
"revId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543"
}
],
"submitRequirementResults": [
{
"submitRequirement": {
"name": "Code-Review",
"description": {
"value": "An informational vote on this revision"
},
"applicabilityExpression": {
"value": {
"expressionString": "is:false"
}
},
"submittabilityExpression": {
"expressionString": "is:true"
},
"overrideExpression": {},
"allowOverrideInChildProjects": false
},
"applicabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"is:false"},"status":"FAIL","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":["is:false"]}
},
"submittabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"is:true"},"status":"NOT_EVALUATED","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":[]}
},
"overrideExpressionResult": {},
"patchSetCommitId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"legacy": {
"value": false
},
"forced": {},
"hidden": {}
},
{
"submitRequirement": {
"name": "Rollcall-Vote",
"description": {
"value": "An informational vote from team members"
},
"applicabilityExpression": {
"value": {
"expressionString": "is:false"
}
},
"submittabilityExpression": {
"expressionString": "is:true"
},
"overrideExpression": {},
"allowOverrideInChildProjects": false
},
"applicabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"is:false"},"status":"FAIL","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":["is:false"]}
},
"submittabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"is:true"},"status":"NOT_EVALUATED","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":[]}
},
"overrideExpressionResult": {},
"patchSetCommitId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"legacy": {
"value": false
},
"forced": {},
"hidden": {}
},
{
"submitRequirement": {
"name": "Verified",
"description": {
"value": "Verified in gate by CI"
},
"applicabilityExpression": {},
"submittabilityExpression": {
"expressionString": "label:Verified\u003dMAX AND -label:Verified\u003dMIN"
},
"overrideExpression": {},
"allowOverrideInChildProjects": false
},
"applicabilityExpressionResult": {},
"submittabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"label:Verified=MAX AND -label:Verified=MIN"},"status":"FAIL","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":["label:Verified=MAX","label:Verified=MIN"]}
},
"overrideExpressionResult": {},
"patchSetCommitId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"legacy": {
"value": false
},
"forced": {},
"hidden": {}
},
{
"submitRequirement": {
"name": "Workflow",
"description": {
"value": "Approved for gate by core reviewer"
},
"applicabilityExpression": {},
"submittabilityExpression": {
"expressionString": "label:Workflow\u003dMAX AND -label:Workflow\u003dMIN"
},
"overrideExpression": {},
"allowOverrideInChildProjects": false
},
"applicabilityExpressionResult": {},
"submittabilityExpressionResult": {
"value": {"expression":{"expressionString":"label:Workflow=MAX AND -label:Workflow=MIN"},"status":"FAIL","errorMessage":{"value":null},"passingAtoms":[],"failingAtoms":["label:Workflow=MAX","label:Workflow=MIN"]}
},
"overrideExpressionResult": {},
"patchSetCommitId": "630046b0e4416eba537a076d3ecd2a44c7c97c6f",
"legacy": {
"value": false
},
"forced": {},
"hidden": {}
}
]
}
View Git Blame Copy Permalink